UDC 629.5.035.5:532.

528
A PRACTICAL NOISE PREDICTION METHOD FOR CAVITATING MARINE PROPELLERS S. EKINCI, F. ÇELIK, M. GUNER

Serkan EKINCI1
Fahri ÇELIK2* A Practical Noise Prediction
Mesut GUNER3
Method for Cavitating Marine
Propellers
Original scientific paper
The article presents an analysis procedure that includes noise prediction for marine propel-
lers. As analysis of the propellers is carried out using a lifting surface method, noise prediction
due to the blade sheet cavitation is taken into account using a semi-empirical formula for low
frequencies. Using this procedure, an application is performed for a conventional propeller model
(DTMB 4148), and noise levels of the propeller are compared with the values proposed by ICES
(International Council for Exploration of the Sea). In addition, two different propellers (DTMB 4119
and Seiun-maru HSP) are analyzed by lifting surface and CFD methods; the results are compared
with those of the Hoshino panel method and experimental ones. It can be concluded that the
present approach provides easy, fast and reliable solutions for noise analysis with low cost and
time for propeller pre-design.
Keywords: propeller analysis, lifting surface, noise prediction, sheet cavitation, CFD

Praktični postupak za predviđanje buke kavitirajućih brodskih vijaka

Authors’ Address (Adresa autora):
Yildiz Technical University, Department
of Naval Architecture and Marine En-
gineering, 34349 Besiktas, Istanbul,
Turkey
E-mail: ekinci@yildiz.edu.tr; fcelik@
yildiz.edu.tr (Corresponding author);
guner@yildiz.edu.tr
Received (Primljeno):2010-05-12
Accepted (Prihvaćeno): 2010-05-20
Open for discussion (Otvoreno za
raspravu): 2011-12-31
Izvorni znanstveni rad
Ovaj članak prikazuje analitički postupak koji uključuje predviđanje buke pomorskih vijaka.
Analiza vijka provedena je primjenom postupka uzgonskih površina, a predviđanje buke kavitirajućih
krila vijaka uzeto je u obzir primjenom poluiskustvene formule za niske frekvencije. Opisana pro-
cedura primijenjena je na konvencionalni vijak (DTMB 4148), a razine buke vijka uspoređene su s
preporučenim vrijednostima od strane ICES (International Council for Exploration of the Sea). Do-
datno, još su se dva različita vijka (DTMB 4119 i Seiun-maru HSP) analizirala postupcima uzgonskih
površina i CFD metodom, a rezultati su uspoređeni s Hoshinovom panel metodom i s rezultatima
pokusa. Može se zaključiti da prikazani pristup predstavlja jednostavno, brzo i pouzdano rješenje
za analizu buke uz mali utrošak sredstava i vremena u fazi pretprojektiranja vijaka.
Ključne riječi: analiza vijka, uzgonska površina, predviđanje buke, kavitacija krila, CFD

Nomenclature P0 Far upstream pressure, at the propeller axis (N/m2)

Pv Vapour pressure of water (N/m2)
VS Design speed (m/s) Ad Propeller disc area (m2)
n Propeller rate of rotation per second f Noise frequency (Hz)
D Propeller diameter (m) ηο Propeller open water efficiency
Z Number of propeller blades
c Propeller blade section chord length (m) 1 Introduction
r/R Non-dimensional radius
t/c Blade section thickness distribution Propeller theories have been considerably improved during
f/c Blade section camber distribution the last decades due to developments in computer technology,
P/D Pitch ratio and today several methods are available for propeller design and
P Pitch (m) analysis. In literature for marine propeller analysis, theoretical
J Advance coefficient methods such as lifting surface, boundary element (BEM) or panel
methods have been widely employed. In lifting surface methods,
Cp Non-dimensional pressure coefficient
the propeller blades are considered as lifting surfaces over which
KQ Torque coefficient
the singularities (vortex, source or dipole) are distributed to model
KT Thrust coefficient
the effects of blade loading and thickness [1,2,3,4,5].
Ls Noise level (dB re 1μPa) In BEMs, for calculation of cavitation field of lifting surfaces,
Ac Sheet cavitation-swept area in propeller disc (m2) the panels are placed on the cavity boundaries, the shape of which
σn Cavitation number is determined in an iterative manner until both the kinematic

61(2010)4, 359-366 359

S. EKINCI, F. ÇELIK, M. GUNER A PRACTICAL NOISE PREDICTION METHOD FOR CAVITATING MARINE PROPELLERS
and dynamic boundary conditions are satisfied. Cavitating or
free-streamline flows were first addressed in nonlinear theory
via the hodograph technique introduced by Helmholtz, Kirchoff
and Levi-Civita [6]. The hodograph technique was extended
numerically to treat arbitrary geometries [7] and later applied
to the analysis of supercavitating hydrofoils in the presence of a
free surface [8]. The linearized cavity theory was introduced by
Tulin in [9] and it quickly became very popular. Unfortunately,
the linearized theory tended to grossly over-predict the thickness
and extent of cavities for thick hydrofoils. And later on, the short
cavity theory was developed by Tulin and Hsu in [10]. A nonlinear
numerical method was employed to analyze cavitating hydrofoils
by using surface vorticity technique [11,12]. A surface vorticity
technique to deal with thick foil sections which employed an open
cavity model was developed by Yamaguchi and Kato in [13].
Similar boundary element method techniques were developed
by Lemonnier and Rowe in [14] and by Rowe and Blottiaux in
[15]. Numerical boundary element methods within non-linear
cavity theory were naturally extended to treat supercavitating
3-D hydrofoils by Pellone and Rowe in [16] and 3-D hydrofoils
with partial cavities by Kinnas and Fine in [17] or cavities with
mixed (partial and supercavities) planforms by Fine and Kinnas
in [18]. Finally, non-linear potential-based boundary element
methods were applied to cavitating propellers in non-uniform
flows by Fine and Kinnas in [19], Kim and Lee in [20], and more
recently to predict sheet or developed tip vortex on lifting bodies
by Kinnas et al. in [21,22], Lee and Kinnas in [23].
Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) methods (or CFD
methods) have been recently used as a practical tool in place of
conventional methods based on the potential theory. RANS meth-
ods have been applied not only to predict the pressure distributions
on blades and viscous flow around ship hulls, but also propulsion
and cavitation characteristics of marine propellers. There are
number of studies in this context. Feng et al. in [24] presented
a CFD model for calculating tip vortex of open water marine
propellers. In their study, a numerical approach based on solving
the RANS equations with k-ε turbulence model was presented
to model the tip vortex flow. Hsiao and Pauley in [25] solved a
3-D incompressible Navier-Stokes equation for a steady state tip
vortex flow over a rectangular foil, and also Hsiao and Pauley in
[26] carried out a different technique to solve the uniform flow
past a marine propeller. Watanabe et al. in [27] presented RANS
simulations of flow around two different conventional propellers.
Both propellers were analysed at non-cavitating and cavitating
operating conditions using the model proposed by Singhal et al.
in [28]. Sanchez-Caja et al. in [29] presented analysis of the flow
around a ducted propeller by a solver which was initially devel-
oped at the Helsinki University of Technology for the analysis
in compressible flow and was a multiblock multigrid structured
finite volume RANS code. Berntsen et al. in [30] investigated
sheet and tip vortex cavitation using a commercial CFD code,
Fluent 5. They used 2D NACA 0015 hydrofoil and 3D NACA
662-415 as an elliptical planform hydrofoil. Gu and Kinnas in
[31] described a general numerical method based on CFD method
for the analysis of contra-rotating and ducted propellers. They
coupled a vortex-Lattice Method (VLM) and a Finite Volume
Method (FVM) based on Euler solver. Abdel-Maksoud in [32]
investigated the aptitude of a general purpose cavitation model for
calculating cavitation behaviour of ship propellers. In that work,
numerical results based on CFD method are given for a cavitating
360 61(2010)4, 359-366
five bladed model propeller operating in steady flow. Kulczyk
et al. in [33] aimed to carry out an analysis of a screw propeller
4119 using the RANS method. They used two turbulence models
(k-ε and k-ω) in calculations. Salvatore et al. in [34] presented
results from the Rome 2008 Workshop on modelling cavitating
propellers. In their work, seven computational models by RANS,
LES (Large-Eddy Simulation) and BEM were benchmarked
against a common test case addressing the INSEAN (The Ital-
ian Ship Model Basin) E779A model propeller in uniform and
non-uniform flows.
Considerable part of noise generated by ship system is under-
water noise. Underwater noise is related to machinery, propeller
and flow noise [35]. Amongst these sources, the propeller noise
is the most important one. Above all, it is important to reduce
propeller noise on the basis of sheet cavitation. There are numer-
ous studies in this context presented in literature. Okamura and
Asano in [36] applied a semi-empirical formula for the prediction
of propeller broadband noise. They applied principle of acous-
tic-mechanical reciprocity for the propeller tonal noise in model
experiment. In that work, propeller cavitation noise is predicted
using theoretical calculations and is compared to data model
experiments obtained from full-scale measurements performed
on two ships, a cargo liner and a training ship. Salvatore and
Ianniello in [37] presented a numerical prediction method of the
acoustic pressure field induced by cavitating marine propellers.
In this work, a hydrodynamic model for transient sheet cavitation
on propellers in a non-uniform inviscid flow field is coupled with
a hydroacoustic model based on the Ffowcs-Williams-Hawkings
equation. Both hydrodynamic and hydroacoustic model equations
are solved via boundary integral formulations. Yılmaz et al. in
[38] carried out a numerical study based on a semi-empirical
approach that is able to predict the cavitation inception point and
calculate the broad-band 1/3-octave noise spectrum for a marine
propeller operating in a non-uniform inflow field. Yoshimura
and Koyanagi in [39] used a design method for a small fisheries
research vessel to reduce the underwater-radiated noise level.
They used measured full-scale noise data and empirical formulas
and also concluded that Brown’s semi-empirical formula is very
useful for the prediction of the cavitation noise level. Seol et al. in
[40] presented a numerical study on the non-cavitating and blade
sheet cavitation noises of the underwater propeller. The noise is
predicted using time-domain acoustic analogy while the flow
field is analyzed with potential-based panel method and, then the
time-dependent pressure and sheet cavity volume data are used as
the input for Ffowcs-Williams-Hawkings formulation to predict
the far-field acoustics. Park et al. in [41] numerically analyzed
the tip vortex cavitation behaviour and sound generation. In their
work, they used hybrid method which integrates RANS solver and
Dissipation Vortex model for flow field. Also, they investigated
relationship between cavitation inception, sound pressure levels
and cavitation nuclei sizes at several conditions.
In this study, an analysis method including noise prediction for
marine propellers is presented. The blade sheet cavitation noise of
the propeller is estimated using a semi-empirical formula which is
adapted to lifting surface method for low frequencies. The blade
sheet cavitation regions, pressure distributions and performance
coefficients of the propeller are calculated based on finite volume
(CFD) and Szantyr’s lifting surface methods (Szantyr, 1994).
As the blade sheet cavitation noise of a propeller (DTMB 4148)
operating underwater is estimated using the present propeller
A PRACTICAL NOISE PREDICTION METHOD FOR CAVITATING MARINE PROPELLERS S. EKINCI, F. ÇELIK, M. GUNER

noise prediction procedure, the results are compared with those 2π rE 2

proposed by ICES and Fraser formula in [42]. Also propeller
performance characteristics and pressure distributions over the
Ac = ∫ ∫ r dr dθ
0 rE 1
(2)

blades for different two propellers (full scale Seiun-maru HSP at

non-uniform velocity field, model DTMB 4119 at uniform inflow) Ad = π D2 / 4 (3)
are determined from lifting surface and CFD methods, and the
results are shown in comparison with those of the experimental where, Ac is sheet cavitation swept area bounded by counters of
and Hoshino panel method. radii rE1and rE2 varying with θ, expressed by (2) and Figure 1.

2 The hydrodynamic analysis and noise

prediction methods of propellers
2.1 Lifting surface method
In this study, a lifting surface model based on Szantyr’s work
is developed to predict the performance of propellers operating
in non-uniform velocity fields. In this method, the hydrodynamic
loading on the propeller blades is represented by appropriate
distribution of vorticity and the thickness of the propeller blades,
modelled by the appropriate distribution of sources and sinks.
These singularities distributed on the surfaces are built up by
the mean lines of the propeller blade sections. It is shown that
the method is capable to predict unsteady pressure distributions
and hydrodynamic forces on propeller blades. The kinematics
boundary condition is the basis for the lifting surface formulation
equation. This condition requires that the resultant relative velocity
of flow at the lifting surface has to be tangent to the surface. In
another words, there should be no flow through the lifting surface.
Detailed descriptions of this method can be found in [5].

2.2 Sheet cavitation noise from propeller blades
Noise emitted from ships into water has become a serious
problem, on account of its harmful interference with the func-
tioning of sonars and other acoustic appliances used by research
vessels, warships, fishing boats and other craft for sound source
probing, underwater communication, detection of objects un-
der water and for other purposes. Propellers and, in particular,
propeller cavitation have been acknowledged to be the most
important noise sources in ship acoustics. In this context, in
order to determine reliable source of underwater noise level, it
is important to predict the level of noise generated due to cavita-
tion. Moreover, it is known that the highest noise among other
noise sources, machinery and flow, is generated by unsteady
sheet cavitation [35].
In general, acoustic calculations are made in the 1/3 octave
band. Here, frequency upper band limit is 21/3 times greater than
the lower band limit. In general, 10-100 kHz frequency range is
used in calculations.
Noise radiated from propeller cavitation can be considered in
two parts. One is called “tonal noise”, which stands for periodic
variation of the total bubble volume of unsteady cavitation due
to rotating propeller in the ship’s wake. The other one is called
“broadband noise”, which is caused by random growth and col-
lapse of cavitation. In the present study, only the source level of
the broadband noise is estimated using Brown’s semi-emprical
formula given by (1).
⎡ Z D4 n3 ⎤ ⎡ Ac ⎤
Ls = 163 + 10 log ⎢ 2 ⎥ + 10 log ⎢ ⎥ (1)
⎣ f ⎦ ⎣ Ad ⎦
Figure 1 Description of sheet cavitation swept area
Slika 1 Prikaz prebrisane površine slojastom kavitacijom
According to Brown’s method, in order to estimate the noise
level on a cavitating propeller, the most important point is finding
out the cavitation swept area. This area is defined by the angular
integration of sheet cavitation area limited by non-dimensional
radius of rE1 and rE2 during a complete revolution of the propel-
ler. The integration is made in an iterative manner by means of
lifting surface method for each blade position within the scope
of hydrodynamic analysis procedure.
It is not easy to precisely estimate cavitation characteristics
(length, area, volume etc.) using cavitation tunnel tests. Cavitation
area which is an important parameter especially in prediction of
the noise caused by unsteady sheet cavitation is hard to be esti-
mated. In this case, importance and availability of the presented
numerical method is of great value.
3 Procedure of hydrodynamic analysis with
noise prediction
In this study, a method for propeller analysis and noise predic-
tion is presented. For a given propeller geometry and operating
conditions (rate of rotation, wake distribution, advance speed,
shaft immersion), the pressure distributions and sheet cavitation
regions over the propeller blades is calculated in non-uniform
flow field. Then sheet cavitation swept area during a rotation is
determined by using sheet cavitation regions calculated from
the lifting surface method for different blade positions. The nar-
row band propeller noise levels are calculated using the swept

61(2010)4, 359-366 361

S. EKINCI, F. ÇELIK, M. GUNER A PRACTICAL NOISE PREDICTION METHOD FOR CAVITATING MARINE PROPELLERS

area in Brown’s semi-empirical formula. Also hydrodynamic
performance characteristics of the propeller can be obtained
by the present propeller analysis procedure. In Figure 2, flow
chart for the propeller analysis and noise prediction procedure
is shown.
Example 1: Noise prediction for DTMB 4148
The data and geometry of the propeller is given in Table 1
and Table 2, respectively.
Table 1 Propeller data of DTMB 4148
Tablica 1 Značajke vijka za DTMB 4148

Blade number 3
Detailed propeller Propeller diameter (m) 0.3048 m
geometry and wake Propeller rate of rotation per second 17.17 (1/s)
distribution
Advance coefficient (JS = VS/ND) 0.954

P0 - P V
Cavitation number (σn = _________ ) 2.576
Calculation of pressure distribution (Cp) on the 1/2ρ(nD)2
blades using Lifting Surface Method (LSM) Skew (degree) 0
Rake ( degree ) 0
NACA66 a= 0.8
Blade section mean line for all
Determination of sheet cavitation regions with radius
LSM
Table 2 Propeller blade geometry for DTMB 4148
Tablica 2 Geometrijske značajke vijčanog krila za DTMB 4148
Calculation of sheet cavitation swept area (AC)
Chord Pitch Thickness Camber
r/R distribution Distribution distribution distribution
(c/D) (P/D) (t/D) (f/D)
0.2 0.16 0.9921 0.0329 0.0174
Calculation of broadband noise levels with
0.3 0.1818 0.9967 0.0282 0.0195
Brown’s formula
0.4 0.2024 0.9987 0.0239 0.0192
0.5 0.2196 0.9975 0.0198 0.0175
0.6 0.2305 0.9944 0.0160 0.0158
0.7 0.2311 0.9907 0.0125 0.0143
Propeller analysis results 0.8 0.2173 0.9850 0.0091 0.0133
0.9 0.1806 0.9788 0.0060 0.0125
0.95 0.1387 0.9740 0.0045 0.0115
1 0.0010 0.9680 0 0

Figure 2 Propeller analysis and noise prediction procedure

Slika 2 Postupak analize vijka i prognoze buke For the DTMB 4148, as shown in Figure 3, the noise levels
obtained from Brown’s semi-empirical formula are given in com-
4 Examples of analysis procedure parison with (4) proposed by ICES and (5) given by Fraser.

In this section the analysis procedure of the propeller men-

tioned above is applied for a model propeller (DTMB 4148) for ⎧135 − 1.66 log f 1 ≤ f ( Hz ) ≤ 1000 ⎫
noise prediction and obtained results are compared with the values Ls = ⎨ ⎬ (4)
proposed by ICES and Fraser formula (Example 1). Besides, for ⎪⎩130 − 22 log( f / 1000) 1000 ≤ f ( Hz ) ≤ 100000 ⎪⎭
a model propeller (DTMB 4119) and a high skewed propeller
(Seiun-maru HSP) at full scale, propeller performance charac- ⎧ ⎡ D6 (60 n )6 Z ⎤ ⎫
teristics are calculated and the results obtained are compared ⎪10 log ⎢ ⎥−6 f ≤ 100 Hz ⎪
with the experimental and CFD results. Pressure distributions ⎪ ⎣ 4 ⎦ ⎪ (5)
Ls = ⎨ ⎬
for both propellers at various conditions are given in comparison ⎪10 log ⎡ D (60 n ) Z ⎤ + 34 − 20 log f
6 6

with experimental, CFD and Hoshino panel method results [43] ⎪ ⎢ ⎥ f ≥ 100 Hz ⎪⎪
⎩ ⎣ 4 ⎦ ⎭
(Example 2).

362 61(2010)4, 359-366

A PRACTICAL NOISE PREDICTION METHOD FOR CAVITATING MARINE PROPELLERS S. EKINCI, F. ÇELIK, M. GUNER

1/3 octave band noise level spectra

GAMBIT. For both propellers, the computational domains are
180
split into two separate cylindrical parts; inner rotational domain
160 (including propeller) and outer stationary domain. The blade
140 surfaces are meshed with smaller triangles and the remaining
G%UHȝ3D[P

ICES
120
100 Brown
surfaces that belong to moving domain, are meshed with larger
80
Fraser
triangles and filled using tetrahedral cells. Finally, a simple cylin-
60 drical mesh is generated for outer stationary block. The number
40
20
of cells in this mesh is about 1,000,000.
0
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Fr equency (Hz)

Figure 3 Noise levels generated by blade sheet cavitations for

DTMB 4148
Slika 3 Razine buke razvijene sa slojastom kavitacijom za DTMB
4148

Example 2: Propeller analyses for DTMB 4119 and

Seiun-maru HSP
The operating conditions of the propellers are given in
Table 3.

Table 3 Propeller data

Tablica 3 Podaci o brodskom vijku Figure 5 Geometry of DTMB 4119
Slika 5 Geometrija od DTMB 4119
DTMB 4119 Seiun-maru HSP
PD (kW) 0.474 360
Boundary conditions set to simulate the flow around a rotat-
VS (knot) 4.938 9 ing propeller in open water are as follows: on the inlet boundary,
N (rpm) 600 90.7 velocity components of uniform stream with the given inflow
D (m) 0.3048 3.6 velocity are imposed for the DTMB 4119, and the flow simula-
tion is performed for steady case using moving reference frame
Z 3 5 technique. Unsteady flow simulation in non-uniform ship wake
Blade section NACA66 a=0.8 Mod. SRI-B is carried out for the Seiun-maru HSP propeller using the sliding
mesh technique implemented in Fluent, and the non-uniform in-
4.1 CFD analysis flow condition at the velocity inlet boundary is imposed through
the Boundary Profile feature of the code. The nominal wake
In CFD analysis, the flow is assumed to be incompressible and
distribution is included to a Boundary Profile file at 120 points.
turbulent. The k-ε (standard) model is chosen as the turbulence
For both propellers, on the exit boundary, the static pressure is
model [44]. In Fluent, the governing equations are discretized
to be zero and on the outer boundary, the slip boundary condi-
using a second-order upwind interpolation scheme, and the dis-
tion is imposed, and on the blade surfaces the no slip condition
cretized equations are solved using SIMPLE algorithm.
is imposed.
Propeller geometries shown in Figures 4-5 are modelled in
Rhino, CAD program, and meshed using FLUENT pre-processor First, solution is carried out in the case of steady flow for
both propellers. Then unsteady simulation is performed only
for the Seiun-maru HSP, time step size is set to 0.00183756 s,
Figure 4 Geometry of Sein-maru HSP
Slika 4 Geometrija od Seinu-maru HSP
which corresponds to rotational angle of 1° and solution data is
saved for every 15°. The solution is considered converged when
continuity residual is less than 10-4 and velocity residuals are less
than 10-5, which are obtained for both cases at almost 600 itera-
tions for steady simulations (approx. 50 iterations for each time
step of unsteady simulation for the Seiun-maru). All numerical
computations are performed on an IBM computer with 2 GB
RAM, Pentium 4 2.7 GHz CPU and 40 GB HDD.
In Figure 6, variation of the DTMB 4119 propeller character-
istics depending on advance coefficient (J) is given. In Figures
7-8, chordwise distribution of pressure coefficient depending on
non-dimensional chord length for r/R = 0.3 and r/R = 0.7 sections
obtained from the lifting surface method, CFD, Hoshino panel
method and model tests for DTMB 4119 is shown.

61(2010)4, 359-366 363

S. EKINCI, F. ÇELIK, M. GUNER A PRACTICAL NOISE PREDICTION METHOD FOR CAVITATING MARINE PROPELLERS

1 Kt-Lifting Surface Method Ș/LIWLQJ6XUIDFH0HWKRG Table 4 Comparison of propeller characteristics of Seiun-maru

10Kq-Lifting Surface Method Kt-Experiment HSP
0.9 Ș([SHULPHQW 10Kq-Experiment
Kt-CFD Ș&)'
Tablica 4 Usporedba značajki vijka za Seiun-maru HSP
0.8 10Kq-CFD
0.7
J=0.851 Lifting surface CFD Experiment
Kt 0.6
10Kq 0.5 KT 0.17266 0.18257 0.172
Ș 0.4 KQ 0.02799 0.03231 0.0268
0.3
ηO 0.65548 0.60055 0.682
0.2

0.1
Figure 9 shows chordwise distribution of the pressure coefficient
0
0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1
at angular blade position of 0 degree at r/R = 0.7 section obtained
Advance coefficient (J)
from the lifting surface method, Hoshino panel method and model
tests for the Seiun-maru HSP. The calculated pressure at 0.7 radius
of the Seiun-maru HSP agrees well with the experiment.
Figure 6 Open water diagram for DTMB 4119
Slika 6 Dijagram otvorene vožnje za DTMB 4119

Figure 9 Chordwise pressure distribution (Cp) at 0.7R blade sec-

Figure 7 Chordwise pressure distribution (Cp) on 0.3R for DTMB
4119
Slika 7 Raspodjela tlaka (CP) duž raspona presjeka vijčanog
krila na 0,3 R za DTMB 4119
Figure 8 Chordwise pressure distribution (Cp) on 0.7R for DTMB
4119
Slika 8 Raspodjela tlaka (CP) duž raspona presjeka vijčanog
krila na 0,7 R za DTMB 4119
In Table 4, comparison of the Seiun-maru HSP propeller
characteristics corresponding to J=0.851 (design condition) for
the lifting surface method, CFD and experiment are given. The
agreement between the methods is generally acceptable.
tion at 0 degree blade position for Seiun-maru HSP
Slika 9 Raspodjela tlaka (CP) duž raspona presjeka vijčanog
krila na presjeku 0,7 R za položaj krila 0° za Seiun-maru
HSP
5 Conclusions
For the reliable determination of the source of underwater
noise, it is important to predict the level of noise generated due
to unsteady blade sheet cavitation which generates significant
noise under water. Thus, a propeller analysis procedure including
noise prediction is presented in this study. It is aimed to be a fast,
reliable and useful tool performed at the beginning of the initial
design stage prior to cavitation tests.
Using this procedure, an example analysis is performed for a
conventional propeller model (DTMB 4148), and the noise levels
of the propeller are compared with the values proposed by ICES.
Comparison of the predicted noise levels has shown sufficiently
good agreement to prove that the presented method is valid for
practical evaluation of propeller cavitation noise. In addition, two
different propellers are analyzed by the lifting surface and CFD
methods; the results are compared with those of the Hoshino
panel method and experimental ones.
Further studies are aimed at the prediction of vibration and
noise effects on ships regarding comfort, performance and detec-
tion, and development of new methods considering vibration and
noise level analysis, led by additional rules established by clas-
sification societies, such as the lifting surface method, covering
tip vortex cavitation. Also, for the calculation program, adding
of brand new graphics tools, changing it into a more visual and
user friendlier state, is aimed at.

364 61(2010)4, 359-366

A PRACTICAL NOISE PREDICTION METHOD FOR CAVITATING MARINE PROPELLERS
References
[1] SZANTYR, J.A.: “A Computer Program for Calculation
of Cavitation Extent and Excitation Forces for A Propeller
Operating in Non-Uniform Velocity Field”, International
Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 26, No.276, 1977.
[2] KERWIN, J. E. and LEE, C.S.: “Prediction of Steady and
Unsteady Marine Propeller Performance by Numerical
Lifting Surface Theory”, Trans. SNAME, Vol.86, 1978.
[3] GREELEY, D.S. and KERWIN, J.E.: “Numerical Methods
for Propeller Design and Analysis in Steady Flow”, Trans.
SNAME, Vol.90, 1982.
[4] SZANTYR, J.A.: “A New Method for the Analysis of Un-
steady Propeller Cavitation and Hull Surface Pressures”,
The Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Vol.127, p.153-
163, 1984.
[5] SZANTYR, J.A.: “A Method for Analysis of Cavitating
Marine Propellers in Non-Uniform Flow”, International
Shipbuilding Progress, Vol.41, No.427, p.223-242, 1994.
[6] BIRKHOFF, G. and ZARANTONELLO, E.: “Jets, Wakes
and Cavities”, Academic Pres. Inc., New York, 1957.
[7] WU, T. and WANG, D.: “A Wake Model for Free-Streamline
Flow Theory. Part 2. Cavity Flows Past Obstacles of Arbi-
trary Profile”, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol.18, p.65-93,
1964.
[8] FURUYA, O.: “Nonlinear Calculation of Arbitrarily Shaped
Supercavitating Hydrofoils Near a Free Surface”, Journal
of Fluid Mechanics, Vol.68, p.21-40, 1975.
[9] TULIN, M.: “Steady Two-Dimensional Cavity Flows About
Slender Bodies”, Technical Report 834, DTMB (David
Taylor Model Basin), Washington, 1953.
[10] TULIN, M. and HSU, C.: “New Applications of Cavity
Flow Theory”, Proceedings: 13th Symposium on Naval
Hydrodynamics, 1980.
[11] UHLMAN, J.: “The Surface Singularity Method Applied to
Partially Cavitating Hydrofoils”, Journal of Ship Research,
Vol.31, No.2, p.107-124, 1987.
[12] UHLMAN, J.: “The Surface Singularity or Boundary
Integral Method Applied to Supercavitating Hydrofoils”,
Journal of Ship Research, Vol.33, No.1, p.16-20, 1989.
[13] YAMAGUCHI, H. and KATO, H.: “On Application of
Nonlinear Cavity Flow Theory to Thick Foil Sections”,
Proceedings: Second International Conference on Cavita-
tion, IMechE, p.167-174, 1983.
[14] LEMONNIER, H. and ROWE, A.: “Another Approach in
Modeling Cavitation Flows”, J. Fluid Mech., 195, p.557-
580, 1998.
[15] ROWE, A. and BLOTTIAUX, O.: “Aspects of Modeling
Partially Cavitating Hydrofoils”, Journal of Ship Research,
Vol.37, No.1, p.34-48, 1993.
[16] PELLONE, C., ROWE, A.: “Supercavitating Hydrofoils in
Non-Linear Theory”, Proceedings of the Third International
Conference on Numerical Ship Hydrodynamics, France,
1981.
[17] KINNAS, S.A., FINE, N.: “A Numerical Nonlinear Analy-
sis of the Flow Around Two-and Three-Dimensional Par-
tially Cavitating Hydrofoils”, Journal of Fluid Mechanics,
Vol.254, p.151-181, 1993.
[18] FINE, N., KINNAS, S.A.: “A Boundary Element Method
for the Analysis of the Flow Around 3-D Cavitating Hydro-
foils”, Journal of Ship Research, Vol.37, p.213-224, 1993.
S. EKINCI, F. ÇELIK, M. GUNER
[19] FINE, N., KINNAS, S.A.: “The Nonlinear Numerical
Prediction of Unsteady Sheet Cavitation for Propellers of
Extreme Geometry”, Proceedings of the Sixth International
Conference on Numerical Ship Hydrodynamics, p.531-544,
1993.
[20] KIM, Y.-G., LEE, C.-S.: “Prediction of Unsteady Perform-
ance of Marine Propellers with Cavitation Using Surface
Panel Method”, Proceedings of the 21st Symposium on
Naval Hydrodynamics, Trondheim, Norway, p.913-928,
1996.
[21] KINNAS, S.A., LEE, H., YOUNG, Y.L.: “Boundary Ele-
ment Techniques for the Prediction of Sheet and Developed
Tip Vortex Cavitation”, Electronic Journal Boundary Ele-
ments, Vol.BETEQ2001, No.2, p.151-178, 2002.
[22] KINNAS, S.A., LEE, H., YOUNG, Y.L.: “Modeling of Un-
steady Sheet Cavitation on Marine Propellers,” International
Journal of Rotating Machinery, Vol. 9, No. 4, p.263-277,
2003.
[23] LEE, H., KINNAS, S.A.: “A BEM for the Modeling of
Unsteady Propeller Sheet Cavitation Inside a Cavitation
Tunnel”, Journal of Computational Mechanics, Vol.37, No.
1, p.41-51, 2005.
[24] FENG, J., WANG, L., AHUJA, V., LEE, Y.T., MERKLE,
C.L.: “CFD Modeling of Tip Vortex for Open Marine
Propellers”, ASME Fluids Engineering Division Summer
Meeting, Paper No:FEDSM98-4873, Washington, USA,
1998.
[25] HSIAO, C.-T., PAULEY, L.L.: “Numerical Study of the
Steady-State Tip Vortex Flow over a Finite-Span Hydrofoil”,
Transactions of the ASME, Journal of Fluids Engineering,
Vol.120, p.345-353, 1998.
[26] HSIAO, C.-T., PAULEY, L.L.: “Numerical Computation of
Tip Vortex Flow Generated by a Marine Propeller”, ASME
Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting: Advances in
Numerical Modelling of Aerodynamics and Hydrodynam-
ics in Turbomachinery, Paper No:FEDSM98-4871,USA,
1998.
[27] WATANABE, T., KAWAMURA, T., TAKEKOSHI, Y.,
MAEDA, M., RHEE, S.H.: “Simulation of Steady and
Unsteady Cavitation on Marine Propeller Using a RANS
CFD Code”, CAV2003, Osaka, Japan, 2003.
[28] SINGHAL, A.K., ATHAVALE, M.M., LI, H.Y., JIANG, Y.:
“Mathematical Basis and Validation of the Full Cavitation
Model”, ASME Journal of Fluids Engineering, Vol.124.
No.3, 2002.
[29] SANCHEZ-CAJA, A., RAUTAHEİMO, P., SIIKONEN,
T.: “Simulation of Incompressible Viscous Flow Around a
Ducted Propeller Using a RANS Equation Solver”, Twenty-
Third Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, 2001.
[30] BERNTSEN, G.S., KJELDSEN, M., ARNDT, R.E.A.:
“Numerical Modeling of Sheet and Tip Vortex Cavitation
with FLUENT 5”, CAV2001, Session B5.006, 2001.
[31] GU, H., KINNAS, S.A.: “Modeling of Contra-Rotating
and Ducted Propellers via Coupling of a Vortex-Lattice
with a Finite Volume Method”, Propellers/Shafting 2003
Symposium, SNAME, Virginia Beach, VA, September 17-
18, 2003.
[32] ABDEL-MAKSOUD, M.: “Numerical and Experimental
Study of Cavitation Behaviour of a Propeller”, Proceeding
STG Sprechtag Cavitation, Hamburg, Germany, 2003.
61(2010)4, 359-366 365
S. EKINCI, F. ÇELIK, M. GUNER A PRACTICAL NOISE PREDICTION METHOD FOR CAVITATING MARINE PROPELLERS
[33] KULCZYK, J. S., SKRABURSKI, L., ZAWISLAK, M.:
“Analysis of Screw Propeller DTMB 4119 using the FLU-
ENT System”, Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineer-
ing, Vol:7, No:4, p.129-136, 2007.
[34] SALVATORE, F., STRECKWALL, T., TERWISGA, V.T.:
“Propeller Cavitation Modelling by CFD-Results from the
VIRTUE 2008 Rome Workshop”, First International Sym-
posium on Marine Propulsors, Norway, 2009.
[35] ROSS, D.: “Mechanics of Underwater Noise”, Pergamon
Press, Oxford, 1976.
[36] OKAMURA, N., ASANO, T.: “Prediction of Propeller
Cavitation Noise and Its Comparison with Full-Scale
Measurements”, Journal of the Society of Naval Architects
of Japan, Vol.164, p.19-33, 1988.
[37] SALVATORE, F., IANIİELLO, S.: “Preliminary Results on
Acoustic Modelling of Cavitating Propellers”, International
Association for Boundary Element Methods, IABEM 2002,
UT Austin, TX, May 28-30, 2002.
[38] YILMAZ, I., GUNER, M., SOYLEMEZ, M.: “Noise Pre-
diction due to Cavitating Propeller of Fisheries Research
Vessel” accepted for presentation at Technics and Technol-
ogy in Fishing Vessels, 15 May 2003, Ancona, Italy.
[39] YOSHIMURA, Y., KOYANAGI, Y.: “Design of a Small
Fisheries Research Vessel with Low Level of Underwater-
366 61(2010)4, 359-366
Radiated Noise”, Journal of the Marine Acoustic Society
of Japan, Vol.31, No.3, p.1-9, 2004.
[40] SEOL, H., SUH, J.C., LEE, S.: “Development of Hybrid
Method for the Prediction of Underwater Propeller Noise”,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol.288, p.345-360,
2005.
[41] PARK, K., SEOL, H.,CHOI W., LEE, S.: “Numerical
Prediction of Tip Vortex Cavitation Behaviour and Noise
Considering Nuclei Size and Distribution”, Applied Acous-
tics, Vol.70, p.674-680, 2009.
[42] FRASER, A.J.: “The Prediction and Minimisation of Propel-
ler Induced Waterborne Noise”, British Maritime Technol-
ogy Limited, Hydromechanics Division, Computational
Hydromechanics Department, 1986.
[43] HOSHINO, T.: “Experimental Data for Unsteady Panel
Calculations and Comparisons (Seiun-maru HSP)” 22nd
ITTC Propulsion Committee Propeller RANS/Panel Method
Workshop Proceedings, 5-6 April 1998, France, p.112-
140.
[44] LAUNDER, B.E., SPALDING, D.B.: “Mathematical Mod-
els of Turbulence”, Academic Press Inc. (London) Limited.
Paper, 169 pp., 1972.
[45] …: www.fluent.com